On 06/06/08 17:25 (GMT-0400) Mike at Green-Beast.com apparently typed:
> "Nathan Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "[...] Additionally, I wouldn't mix serif / sans-serif the way you did
> the in
> example. :)"
> I'm curious about the comment? Why not? I ask as I've done this before
> myself thinking it was fine.
> Say if I want Georgia as the primary type face, but don't want to back it up
> with another serif-type font, like Times New Roman ('cause it's poor web
> font unlike Georgia that was created just for the web), so I back it up
> instead with a sans serif type font, then a sans serif generic font family
> at the end.
> I always thought that was just a peachy idea. But it's not?
All you're really doing is trying to guarantee your visitor doesn't get
to see his preferred font-family. A designer intimately familiar with
the finer points of typography won't find a serif font an acceptable
substitute for an unavailable sans-serif font, or vice versa. If you
can't make up your mind between serif and sans-serif, let the visitor
have a shot at what he'd rather have anyway.
--
"All have sinned & fall short of the glory of God." Romans 3:23 NIV
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
